|
C. Censorship, Red Lines and Self-Censorship
A
journalist in Palestine faces both external censorship, which restricts
his freedom of opinion and expression, and the consequences of
self-censorship, which limit his initiative to reflect on issues he
believes may exceed the limits of the red lines. This fact makes the local
press behave like parrots, repeating without questions or criticism that
which is expected of them. We may exclude the “Al-Hayat Al-Jadida”
newspaper which was established in June 1999 and publishes reports and
essays criticizing officials in certain institutions. The Authority
considers this to be slander rather than constructive criticism.
We have
categorized censorship measures that journalists face on a daily basis
under the following:
1. Israeli censorship
2. Palestinian censorship
3. Tribal censorship (customs and
traditions)
4. Advertising companies’ censorship
5. Self-censorship
1. Israeli Censorship
During the premierships of Rabin and Peres, Israeli censorship was
formal: the censor only censored reports on the Israeli Intelligence
Service and some reports on the Palestinian opposition. But when
Netanhyahu took over, the censor began to delete reports on both the
Authority as well as the opposition. Israeli radio also submitted to the
views of the censor. An example of the latter is when in July 1999 the
“Shin Bet” (Israeli Intelligence Service) summoned the Chief Secretary and
the Editor-in-Chief of al-Quds newspaper to discuss a report
al-Quds had published one and a half years previously concerning an attack
carried out by Hamas. That particular report had been taken from Israeli
radio.
(Taken from an interview with a
journalist who asked that his name be withheld)
News and reports that have to go to the censor include those covering the
following subjects: settlements, the status of Jerusalem, borders and
announcements potentially fuelling nationalist sentiments, any information
pertaining to Israeli military forces (such as the identity of officers’
who have abused citizens) and the names of those whose houses have been
demolished. Linguistic censorship includes removal of terms such as
“martyr”.
2. Palestinian Censorship
The red lines which the PA has drawn for journalists cover such
varied subjects as writing about the President and his family in a
critical manner through writing about security organs or the security
situation and the presentation of ideas proposed by the opposition to
speaking about Hamas leaders wanted by the Authority. The following are
only some of the examples.
The PA arrested the journalist Ala’a Saftawi on the basis of a leading
article he had written for al-Istiqlal newspaper about the
deteriorating security situation. It was held to be too critical of the
President.
Dr. Ghazi Hamad was arrested and tortured for ten days on the basis of an
essay he had written for al-Istiqlal newspaper on the relationship
between the Palestinian people and the security services.
Journalist Taher Shreiteh, a Reuters correspondent, was arrested for six
days because he released a film that showed the Israeli soldier Nahshon
Vaxman, kidnapped by Hamas.
On 14 May 1996 the journalist Fayez Ibrahim Noureddin was arrested because
he had published a photo in al-Ayyam newspaper showing men pushing
a donkey into the sea. Underneath he had written “Donkeys’ Speciality”.
For further information see the section
on “Abusing Journalists Rights”
3. Tribal Censorship
Tribe mentality and the “logic” of physical force still dominates
on many issues within Palestinian society. This is at least t be partly
explained by the weakness of the Palestinian judicial system. Because
journalists are part of this community, they are limited by this approach
and false logic. Consequently, PHRMG would underline that the press does
not comment on tribal disputes and fails to criticize questionable
traditions.
| I once
wrote a report on the phenomenon of young guys following young girls
as they come out from school, especially on Saturday when the workers
in Israel are off. But the next day the newspaper’s administration
called me and asked me not to come to work because of the fact that
there were about fifty young men outside the building threatening to
attack me because of the report. A journalist who works in a
local daily newspaper. |
Some serious phenomena in Palestinian society require study and analysis,
but journalists fear to do so because they are afraid of being harmed at
their place of work. There are, for example, cases of gunfire and murder
occurring in the community that need to be looked into in some detail, and
yet on certain occasions such cases of murder are not reported at all. A
journalist writing about such incidents risks being harmed. To take but
one example, two years ago a journalist wrote, in a periodical, about a
wedding in which the bride sat on a chair placed next to another chair on
which the photo of the bridegroom had be placed. He was in America. The
journalist in question did not mention names or places, and yet the family
of the bride came to the offices of the periodical and threatened its
administration.
PHRMG interview with
journalist Majed Arouri
4. Advertising Companies’
Censorship
Big advertising companies who
regularly have their commercial advertisements published exert great
influence: with a view to retaining their sources of funding, newspapers
refuse to publish any material that may harm the interest of these
companies, such as articles on the negative effects of smoking.
| Some local
newspapers, though not all of them, refuse to publish comments working
against the interests of a certain company so that the papers don’t
loose their advertisements. For example, an administrator in the
Palestinian Telecommunications Co. wrote about many questionable
issues related to that company: the newspaper refused to publish these
because it feared that this would damage its relationship with an
important source of advertising revenue.PHRMG interview with
journalist Majed Arouri |
5. Self-Censorship
Self-censorship is considered more serious than external
censorship because it not only prevents the journalist from publishing
that which he as written, but also from writing, thinking or analyzing in
the first place. He clearly wishes to avoid wasting time on writing
material that may not be published.
Forms of self-censorship:
The failure of our own press to report on the news and reports that we
read about in the foreign press, such as on the weakness in the
performance of our leadership, on corruption or analysis of political
reports and other issues.
The focus on the Authority’s reaction to an action, rather than on
the action itself. Usually the latter is of more importance. An example is
that when a prisoner dies in jail, no details are given about the prisoner
himself or about the reason for his death: the only reporting done is on
the reaction of Authority’s officials.
The avoidance of giving the name of the security service that has
committed a violation: all that is mentioned is “the security services”.
The papers fear that if they give the precise reference, they will be
pursued by officials of that service.
The failure of some newspapers to report on the interference committed by
a security organ against employees of those papers.
Self-censorship also occurs when journalists hear of colleagues from other
papers being abused by the security services on the basis of having
crossed the red lines: the former desist from criticism as a result of
fear of undergoing the same experience or as a result of remembering their
own personal experience of similar treatment.
|
Before officially publishing the report on
corruption, the newspaper refused to publish it. If it had agreed to
publication, this would have been a precedent. I now impose
self-censorship and consequently do not write anything concerning the
performance of the Authority or the Authority’s political
prisoners. A journalist who refused to have his name printed.
|
All the above concerns what is called the red line which no one working in
the media may cross. There is, unfortunately, no set of clear and precise
ethics provided for by Palestinian law that defines the limits to what the
media may say. Spontaneously imposing self-censorship on the written and
spoken word as well as on intentions to write or speak out is therefore
inevitable. It means taking the initiative when writing about a subject
that has a direct or indirect relation with the Palestinian security
organs or when criticizing a public personality for the performance of the
Authority or of one of its departments. Tackling such issues or even
thinking about them makes the journalist worry, reluctant, afraid and
nervous: should he write about the matter directly or indirectly? Should
he give the subject full or partial coverage? Or should he ignore the
whole issue and write about something comparatively less important in the
life of the Palestinian people?
|
